It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama Storms The World Stage And Rips Republicans For Being Afraid Of The Media and Orphans

page: 8
19
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

You, me and most members on ATS live in North America, Western Europe and Australia...with some Kiwis too. None of us have been bombed in our life-times, in our own countries. Yeah, IRA, ETA and Twin Towers, but they aren't the same as aerial bombings are they? Not the same as incoming from off-shore warships.



That leaves a decade unaccounted for...a decade where we have seen a dramatic rise in hatred against the US from Muslim extremists.


Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Northern Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Sudan have all been bombed by Russian and Allied forces. Is it at all possible that the 'dramatic rise in hatred' has something to do with them being bombed by the West with the US as figurehead?




posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

First, I don't need to cite sources when what I bring up are questions and not statements. I never claimed that Muslim extremism is the forefront of terrorism in America at the moment, but it's well known that Muslim extremism has increased in the last decade quite dramatically.

And the Lazarus Poem is not a part of this conversation or thread, so let's not derail just for fun so that we can divert from the topic. That poem has zero to do with what I said.

Zero.

I'm getting away from my computer now, so if I don't respond in the near future, it's not because I don't like this discourse, I just have real life with which to contend.

Take care.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

What caused the dramatic rise in hatred that led to the Barbary Pirates then? And then there was that time that Mohammad was told Allah had more or less lost patience with the Jews because they refused to recognize the brilliance of Allah and the Muslims went on a rampage against the local Jews.

Basically, for sects of Islam, it doesn't take much for their "hatred" to rise, and it hasn't since the inception of their religion.

Maybe we should examine the tribal practices of the Arab peoples to get a better sense of what's going on because they've been raising hatred against each other long before Mohammad or before him, God, came along.

edit on 19-11-2015 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

The Statue of Liberty was a gift to the United States from the people of France. IE the inscription I hear so many people going on and on about is not American. American values have always been to welcome migrants but quit throwing the damn statue into the political cesspool.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

Especially if you just happen to have one of the targets living next door. Imagine hating those ISIS guys, but being stuck with them as neighbors. After enough violence and bombings, you'll probably grow to hate the policies of Western governments.

I can't find the study, but most refuges don't seem to think the West's approach is working or will work. They also think that the agenda of the West is solely for benefit of America, Israel, UK ect...

If that is what those people think, then we need to show them otherwise IMO...



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 02:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Krazysh0t

The Statue of Liberty was a gift to the United States from the people of France. IE the inscription I hear so many people going on and on about is not American. American values have always been to welcome migrants but quit throwing the damn statue into the political cesspool.


Those are American values filtered through Europe. We took their trash in basically, and to a certain extent, it still colors how they view us today.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 02:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

Probably...but that's another thread for another time.

I'm a whole-hearted believer that if we get our troops out of there and quit meddling in the ME affairs, that they would start focusing on themselves again. But that area will always be full of war, whether we're there or not. Therefore, let them attack each other--we have no business trying to fix an area that is victim to self-induced perpetual war.

But like I said, that's another thread altogether.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

The Middle East has been dominated by us for decades. It's the other side of the world and we've controlled the area because it suited our needs...and because we could.

That's just historical fact with no value judgement added.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

There. I probably agree with you in the gist of your post


Maybe the Middle East would be a mess all by itself? They've got tribalism, feuds and not much democracy. They've had plenty of dictators too.

On the other hand, they haven't had the chance to screw up for themselves in the past few decades. We've propped up some of their dictators and have constantly been influencing their domestic policies.

Maybe if the West stepped back, the ME could find its own way? Time would tell.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 04:12 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

It's not an opinion.

How does that matter? Is our Constitution an opinion? Does it guarantee our safety? Is that something that's even possible?


In the U.S., the source of governmental power lies with the people. That power represents a social contract and the idea that government exists for the benefit of its citizens. If the federal government is not protecting the people, it should be dissolved and a new government founded.

That power represents a social contract - is it enforceable? Do you think we should dissolve our government over this?

There are no guarantees in life. My government can only do so much to make sure my life is safe. My government has chosen, at times, to do things that have made all of us less safe. You are saying that this is one of those times - the government is choosing to put us at risk as a nation?

We are already at risk - have been for a while. Decades even. Now - here it is on our doorstep and we need somebody to blame and punish


And I can see how the refugee crisis can/will be exploited by war profiteers, too, so I have had enough.

The refugees have become political pawns. In the meantime, what should happen to the refugees?


In my opinion, part of a compromised solution should be a thorough investigation into every person profiting from the War on Terror and a full accounting of the money 'lost' because of it. That's what Obama and the federal government should have to 'give up' to reach a compromise. But you won't hear him giving in to that. He would rather ask everything of anyone who disagrees with him...AND DEMAND THEIR TRUST, too.

In your dreams

In the meantime, what happens to the refugees?


I don't see how innocent Syrian refugees benefit from growing the War on Terror to put money in the pockets of those who profit. Rule out their role in terrorism first, because they have the motive. They are the ones gaining from it.

So, all of that highfalutin talk above was just your way of saying - no dice maybe innocent people. You're not refugees until we say you are, and until we say you are - you are terrorists and you are on your own

The Responsibility to Protect: Human Rights and Humanitarian Dimensions


Everyone would agree that international human rights standards are the foundation of R2P. States have an obligation to protect their populations from the worst atrocities on the basis of international human rights precepts. The Global Centre for R2P affirms this on its website, but it then goes on to say that it was not until the advent of R2P that the international community accepted for the first time the collective responsibility to act should states fail to protect citizens from genocide, ethnic cleansing, war crimes or crimes against humanity.


People like to use the word vetted a lot these days. Well, easier said than done. Terrorists are going to find a way in. We're all in grave danger - Americans aren't used to that, and I'm sure some would rather compromise than do the right thing

We could err on the side of caution - but the way I see it, we've not really gained anything by stalling. All we do is make the situation worse



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 04:18 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko


What caused the dramatic rise in hatred that led to the Barbary Pirates then?

God knows

I hear there was a lot of tension between neanderthals and humans at one time. Some people's kids - am I right?



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 04:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
Apologies up front because I only wanted to post this story because I adore this headline. And the story? Well it has everything...ISIL, Putin, and calling people out on their weak sauce too.


...but they’re scared of widows and orphans...




Of all the words to choose, he really used the term "widows"? Oh that's just perfect. His speechwriters really need a good slap, assuming they weren't intentionally sabotaging his speech.

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

Oh and don't forget all the young kids - and yes, orphans - that ISIS are currently training up to fight.

cdn.images.express.co.uk...


Silly, silly Obama.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 04:31 PM
link   
And if his tantrum wasn't enough, he was also late as the rest of the G20 held a moment of silence for the Paris victims. It's very obvious where this guy stands. What a tool. And we have to put up with him for another year,

"Obama is LATE for moment of silence as the rest of the G20 leaders hold somber observance to mourn Paris attacks"

"President Barack Obama arrived late to a 'moment of silence' in Belek, Turkey on Sunday as the rest of the world's most powerful leaders stood for a somber observance to honor Friday's terror-attack victims in France.
The G20 leaders 'gathered around a large round table for their first working session,' a White House pool reporter wrote from the scene.
'President Erdogan began the session with a one-minute moment of silence. The leaders stood to observe the moment. President Obama had not yet arrived and walked in at 4:34pm, after the moment of silence had begun.' "
www.dailymail.co.uk... Y1



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 04:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
How does that matter? Is our Constitution an opinion? Does it guarantee our safety? Is that something that's even possible?

That power represents a social contract - is it enforceable? Do you think we should dissolve our government over this?


Yes, it's enforceable. Should we enforce it? Let's investigate and find out.


originally posted by: Spiramirabilis

In the meantime, what happens to the refugees?

So, all of that highfalutin talk above was just your way of saying - no dice maybe innocent people. You're not refugees until we say you are, and until we say you are - you are terrorists and you are on your own


You do realize that even Obama's plan includes screening and identification processes, eh?


originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
People like to use the word vetted a lot these days. Well, easier said than done. Terrorists are going to find a way in. We're all in grave danger - Americans aren't used to that, and I'm sure some would rather compromise than do the right thing

We could err on the side of caution - but the way I see it, we've not really gained anything by stalling. All we do is make the situation worse


Well, why have any national security measures then if they aren't effective?

And there's no need to stall. Let's investigate the war profiteers while the refugees are brought in and hold anyone and everyone accountable implicated in exacerbating the War on Terror and aiding/funding/arming/organizing ISIS. In my dreams? All it takes is for people, like yourself, who are anxious to bring in the refugees to demand it.

On second thought...that is probably a fat chance. It isn't just republicans who profit from the War on Terror.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 05:24 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye


Yes, it's enforceable. Should we enforce it? Let's investigate and find out.

Initially I said: People need to feel safe - and be safe as possible. It's not something anyone can ever guarantee however

Your reply:


It's not an opinion. In the U.S., the source of governmental power lies with the people. That power represents a social contract and the idea that government exists for the benefit of its citizens. If the federal government is not protecting the people, it should be dissolved and a new government founded.


I asked you: does our Constitution promise us that we will be protected by our government? Is it guaranteed?


You do realize that even Obama's plan includes screening and identification processes, eh?

I do. That's not an answer to my question - which I'm beginning to realize is not something I should expect


Well, why have any national security measures then if they aren't effective?

Interesting question. I didn't suggest that we shouldn't (did I?). Of course there are security measures already in place, which makes me wonder about your position. What is it you would do above and beyond what's already being done?

Then, about the more interesting part of your question - if they aren't effective? If they can't guarantee that nobody will slip through?


And there's no need to stall. Let's investigate the war profiteers while the refugees are brought in and hold anyone and everyone accountable implicated in exacerbating the War on Terror and aiding/funding/arming/organizing ISIS. In my dreams? All it takes is for people, like yourself, who are anxious to bring in the refugees to demand it.


While they're being brought in? Fair enough. In reality that's something that needs to happen now

It's winter, there are kids involved, and they need shelter and food now. Start the paperwork - fine by me


It isn't just republicans who profit from the War on Terror.

No doubt a few Independents are making a killing too. They don't walk on water you know

:-)



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 05:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

I would admire anyone in the office who called them out on their childish and embarrassing behavior and opportunistic rhetoric. They need to be spanked now and then. And I agree that this Obama should have shown up sooner. He was far too patient.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 05:50 PM
link   


Oy.
edit on 11/19/2015 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 06:07 PM
link   
a reply to: ~Lucidity

No offense but yes unarmed Christians and other religious minorities are the TRUE REFUGEES. They get killed by both sides and can't even fight back with no militia or army like the Kurds. Any sane person would see they are the highest "at risk,displaced" population in the conflict. It's sad that you can't see that. BTW, I felt the same way with the Muslims in the Balkans. You protect those who are most vunerable.
edit on 19-11-2015 by pavil because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 06:20 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Actually it was a project for Egypt ,but their government fell so WE picked it up.
That is hidden in history books.
edit on 19-11-2015 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 06:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis

No doubt a few Independents are making a killing too. They don't walk on water you know

:-)


Fantastic. Investigate independents, too. They don't represent me, I am independent. Investigate away! We aren't a party.

But let's be real, the war profiteers are donating to both republicans and democrats...and that does not make them independent.




top topics



 
19
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join